Categories

July 11, 2016 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Koa House

In 1840, John Joseph Halstead sailed to Hawai‘i on a whaling ship bringing with him from New York carpentry and cabinet-makings skills. He set up a shop in Lāhainā. (Martin) He was said to be the first man to put up a frame house in Lāhainā.

With the news of the discovery of gold in California in 1848, came orders from San Francisco merchants for Irish potatoes and other food supplies for those heading to the gold fields.

Halstead did not join the pioneers of 1849; He moved over to Kalepolepo, along the Kihei shoreline, with his family and shortly thereafter built a new house for himself. (Wilcox)

It was a large Pennsylvania Dutch style house made entirely of koa, built next to the south wall of Koʻieʻie Loko I‘a (fishpond) (also called Kalepolepo Fishpond.)

Halstead’s three story house/store was nicknamed the ‘Koa House.’ With the mullet-filled fishpond, the Koa House became a popular retreat for Hawaiian royalty such as Kamehameha III, IV, V and Lunalilo. (Starr)

No one remembers the actual date of construction of Koa House, but the fact that King Liholiho (Kamehameha IV), visited Kalepolepo on a royal tour immediately after accession to the throne in the fall of 1854, and stayed overnight as the guest of Halstead, its owner, is proof it was built before that time. (Wilcox)

Its timbers were from saw mills in East Makawao and from Kula, partly hewn and whip-sawed by hand Into shape, for labor was cheap In the good old days. Also pine and other material brought around Cape Horn by early traders.

When finished the first floor was fitted up with koa wood counters and shelves, and used for a store. The upper floors were used for living quarters. Many of the larger pieces of furniture were made of koa wood by Halstead himself. (Wilcox)

He opened a trading station on the lower floor. Whalers came ashore to buy fresh produce that was brought in by the farmers via the Kalepolepo Road.

He promoted the Irish potato industry in Kula, which even then was a thriving industry for provisioning whale ships in their seasonal voyages after whales.

At Halstead’s Kalepolepo Store a cartload of potatoes – thirty to forty bags – could readily be exchanged for a bolt of silk or other provisions.

During the Irish potato boom of those days any native farmer with an acre or two of potatoes would sell his crop, and as soon as he received payment in fifty-dollar gold pieces he would hurry off to the nearest store to buy a silk dress for his wife or a broadcloth suit for himself.

Halstead held his share of the Irish potato trade against more promising cash offers made by his business rivals. So lively was the competition that LL Torbert of ʻUlupalakua conceived the idea of an Irish potato corner.

He sent out his men and bought up all the Irish potatoes in sight, paying as high as five dollars for a bag of potatoes, a fabulous price for those days when native labor was plentiful at twenty-five cents a day.

Having cornered all the potatoes to be had, he shipped about $20,000 worth by the bark Josephine for San Francisco. The bark proved leaky, water got into the potato-filled holds and rotted them so that on arrival at San Francisco not enough good potatoes were left in the cargo to pay the freight bill.

At that time Kalepolepo was a thriving village, with two churches, a Mormon church where George Cannon or Walter Murray Gibson expounded the Christian doctrines of Joseph Smith against Christian Calvinism as preached by the Reverend Green and David Malo.

Reportedly, Halstead’s old house at Kalepolepo was Rev Green’s granary during the wheat boom of the 1850s and early-1860s, when the upper Makawao country from Maliko to Waiohuli was cropped to wheat.

Possibly some wheat may have been shipped from Kalepolepo in those days, for from early times to the late-1860s it was a shipping port for Wailuku and Kula. Halstead had one or two big warehouses standing makai of his residence.

In the late sixties the Irish potato trade had become unimportant and later ceased altogether. In 1876, Halstead closed his store and moved to ʻUlupalakua, where he died eleven years later, May 3, 1887. (Wilcox)

The koa house remained standing until it was burned down in 1946 by the Kihei Yacht Club. (NPS) (Lots of information here is from NPS and Wilcox.)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

John Joseph Halstead-Koa House-Paradise of the Pacific-1921

Kihei Coastline-Kalepolepo-Pepalis

Koieie_Fishpond-NPS

Koieie-Fishpond-NPS

Uwaikikilani Halstead-Stanley-Hassrick-1849

Uwaikikilani Halstead-Stanley-Hassrick

John Joseph Halstead-gravestone

July 10, 2016 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Broken Bones

The Chiefs’ Children’s School (The Royal School) was founded in 1839. The cornerstone of the original school was laid on June 28, 1839 in the area of the old barracks of ʻIolani Palace (at about the site of the present State Capitol of Hawaiʻi.)

The school was created by King Kamehameha III; the main goal of this school was to groom the next generation of the highest ranking chief’s children of the realm and secure their positions for Hawaii’s Kingdom.

Seven families were eligible under succession laws stated in the 1840 Constitution of the Kingdom of Hawai‘i; Kamehameha III called on seven boys and seven girls of his family to board in the Chief’s Children’s School.

The Chiefs’ Children’s School was unique because for the first time Aliʻi children would be brought together in a group to be taught, ostensibly, about the ways of governance.

Amos Starr Cooke (1810–1871) and Juliette Montague Cooke (1812-1896), missionaries from the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, were selected to teach the 16 royal children and run the school.

In this school were educated the Hawai‘i sovereigns who reigned over the Hawaiian people from 1855, namely, Alexander Liholiho (King Kamehameha IV,) Queen Emma, Lot Kamehameha (King Kamehameha V,) King William Lunalilo, King David Kalākaua and Queen Lydia Lili‘uokalani.

In addition, the following royal family members were taught there: Princess Bernice Pauahi Bishop, Princess Elizabeth Kekaaniau Pratt, Prince Moses Kekuaiwa, Princess Jane Loeau Jasper, Princess Victoria Kamāmalu, Prince Peter Young Kaeo, Prince William Pitt Kīnaʻu, Princess Abigail Maheha, Prince James Kaliokalani and Princess Mary Polly Paʻaʻāina.

In a letter requesting the Cookes to teach and Judd to care for the children, King Kamehameha III wrote, “Greetings to you all, Teachers – Where are you, all you teachers? We ask Mr. Cooke to be teacher for our royal children. He is the teacher of our royal children and Dr. Judd is the one to take care of the royal children because we two hold Dr Judd as necessary for the children and also in certain difficulties between us and you all.”

But all were not always well. “On Saturday afternoon, when we returned from bathing David fell off his horse and broke his arm so I ran after his father and the Gov and Abigail’s mother came to see him and Dr Judd set it.” (Monday, July 29, 1844 entry in Prince Lot Kapuāiwa’s diary while at the Chiefs’ Children’s School)

Amos Cooke’s journal entry on the day of the accident explains what happened, “About 3 o’clock we went to bathe & all the boys went & I took special pains to wash them very clean.”

“We returned in very good spirits & most of us had reached home, but (David, written in different ink) came on behind & just as he was turning the last corner his horse jumped one side & threw him off, & broke his right shoulder bone near the elbow.”

“Dr Judd came in immediately & set it. His head was bruised some & so was one of his ankles. He now lies in the room occupied by Mr Sturges when he was here. The king & suite have not come to day as was expected.” (Amos Cooke Journal, July 27, 1844)

Cooke later noted, “… though the youngest boy, David, fell from his horse in July last and broke his right shoulder bone. During the setting of it, and also a resetting, he neither flinched nor shed a tear. (Letter Amos Cooke to Rev D Gree, March 22, 1845)

By the entries in Prince Lot’s journal, it appears the students of the Chief’s Childrens’ School (Royal School) regularly rode horses – typically before breakfast. And, Kalākaua was not the only one to fall and break a bone.

A month before Kalākaua’s fall, Prince Lot noted the third anniversary that Moses Kekūāiwa also “fell off from his horse and broke his arm”. (Prince lot, June 20, 1844 Journal entry)

The Cooke’s also experienced bone breaks; their daughter “Juliette has been so unfortunate as to break her arm 10 days since. She is still under some restraint – gets hurt frequently. Bears it very well.”

“It is no small affair to have a broken bone in the family, but I am so thankful that it is only her arm, her head and back being all safe that I have not felt like complaining. I feel more than common cheerfulness and gratitude.” (Amos Cooke Letter to his mother, August 27, 1847)

Another unidentified bone break happened later, “Juliette and our children are enjoying usual health. Our little scholar with a broken leg has nearly recovered. He hobbles about.” (Amos Cooke Letter to his mother, July 20, 1848)

There were some other close calls, “This afternoon, at recess, Jane & Abigail were swinging Emma & swung her so forcibly that she hit against the post & injured her hip & knee.”

“This evening sent for Dr Judd who says no bones are broken. This afternoon Dr Rooke sailed for Maui in the Kahaelaia & we hesitated about letting Emma go home until her mother came, & took her home.” (Cooke Journal, October 13, 1842)

While Cooke noted the student injuries, he was not immune to injury himself. “After dinner at 2 o’clock I started alone for Waialua. … I went several miles inland …. In going down a pale (pali) & getting back to the road I lost Wm’s poncho, & left word with an old woman if she found it to send it to Mr Bishop’s.”

“I rode on pleasantly until within 2 ½ or 3 miles of Waialua, & while descending a little, my horse galloping & my reins down & holding a parasol with both hands, the horse stumbled & rolled over throwing me off on the near side. It was all done in an instant & when I started up & found my left arm lame & fearing some accident I began to feel to see if any bones were broken.”

“None were broken but my left shoulder was dislocated. At first, I felt faint, but I soon slung my arm in a handkerchief got up on my horse & started for Mr Wilcox’s with a hope that he might be able to set it.” (Cooke Journal, August 12, 1845)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Photograph_of_the_Royal_School,_probably_after_1848

July 7, 2016 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

Annexation Into US – Is A Treaty Required?

“There is no provision in the Constitution by which the national government is specifically authorized to acquire territory; and only by a great effort of the imagination can the substantive power to do so be found in the terms of any or all of the enumerated powers.”

“The United States has acquired territory through cession, purchase, conquest, annexation, treaty, and discovery and occupation. These methods are permissible under international law and have been approved by the Supreme Court.”

“The executive and the legislature have performed different roles in the acquisition of territory by each of these means. Unfortunately, the historical practice does not supply a precise explanation of where the Constitution places the power to acquire territory for the United States.” (Legal Issues Raised by Proposed Presidential Proclamation To Extend the Territorial Sea, October 4, 1988)

“In the Legal Tender Cases, Mr. Justice Strong, speaking for the majority of the court, said that the adoption of the first ten amendments indicated that in the judgment of those who adopted the Constitution there were powers created by it not specified nor deducible from, or ancillary to, any one specified power ‘but which grew out of the aggregate of powers conferred upon the government, or out of the sovereignty instituted.’”

“Mr. Justice Bradley in a concurring opinion characterized the United States as ‘a national government and the only government in this country having the character of nationality,’ and added:”

“Such being the character of the General government, it seems to be a self-evident proposition that it is invested with all those inherent and implied powers which, at the time of adopting the Constitution, were generally considered to belong to every government as such, and as being essential to the exercise of its functions.” (George Sutherland, Constitutional Power and World Affairs (1919))

“The power of congress to acquire new territory, either by conquest, purchase, or annexation, was much debated at the time of the acquisition of Louisiana from France, in 1803, and in a less degree in connection with the purchase of Florida and of Alaska.”

“It has now come to be recognized and established, rather by precedent and the general acquiescence of the people, than by any strict constitutional justification. In fact, the power cannot be derived from any narrow or technical interpretation of the constitution.”

“But it is necessary to recognize the fact that there is in this country a national sovereignty. That being conceded, it easily follows that the right to acquire territory is incidental to this sovereignty. It is, in effect, a resulting power, growing necessarily out of the aggregate of powers delegated to the national government by the constitution.” (Handbook of American Constitutional Law)

“Territory is acquired by discovery and occupation where no other recognized nation asserts sovereignty over such territory. In contrast, when territory is acquired by treaty, purchase, cession, or conquest, it is acquired from another nation.” (Footnote, Legal Issues Raised by Proposed Presidential Proclamation To Extend the Territorial Sea, October 4, 1988)

“We have acquired much territory under treaty provisions and by conquest, and in such case the acquisition may be regarded as incidental to the powers mentioned …”

“… but we have also acquired territory by original discovery and appropriation alone. Such is the fact with reference to a large portion of Oregon; and such is peculiarly the fact with reference to certain small islands of the sea— the so-called Guano Islands.” (George Sutherland, Constitutional Power and World Affairs (1919))

“An act of congress passed in 1856, declared that guano islands taken into possession and occupation by American citizens, might be declared by the President to be ‘appertaining to the United States.’” (Handbook of American Constitutional Law)

“An act of Congress provides for the acquisition by Executive proclamation of any islands valuable for their deposits of guano, discovered by citizens of the United States and not, at the time of discovery, occupied or possessed by any other government or its citizens.” (George Sutherland, Constitutional Power and World Affairs (1919))

“In regard to this statute, the supreme court has recently declared that ‘by the law of nations, recognized by all civilized states, dominion of new territory may be acquired by discovery and occupation, as well as by cession or conquest …”

“‘… and when citizens or subjects of one nation, in its name, and by its authority or assent, take and hold actual, continuous, and useful possession (although only for the purpose of carrying on a particular business, such as catching and curing fish, or working mines) of territory unoccupied by any other government or its citizens …’”

“‘… the nation to which they belong may exercise such jurisdiction and for such period as it sees fit over territory so acquired. This principle affords ample warrant for the legislation of congress concerning guano islands.’” (Handbook of American Constitutional Law)

In 1811, another annexation of foreign territory (West Florida) resulted from a Presidential Proclamation followed by an act of Congress (House and Senate participation.)

The Supreme Court, in speaking of the power of Congress to establish the Territorial Government in Florida until it should become a state, declared, “In the mean time, Florida continues to be a territory of the United States …”

“… governed by virtue of that clause in the Constitution, which empowers Congress ‘to make all needful rules and regulations, respecting the territory, or other property belonging to the United States.’”

“Perhaps the power of governing a territory belonging to the United States, which has not, by becoming a state acquired the means of self-government, may result necessarily from the facts, that it is not within the jurisdiction of any particular state, and is within the power and jurisdiction of the United States.”

“The right to govern, may be the inevitable consequence of the right to acquire territory. Whichever may be the source whence the power is derived, the possession of it is unquestioned.” (Canter Decision – Decision also cited in Dred Scott Decision)

Then, in Hawai‘i, “In 1893, ‘[a] so-called Committee of Safety, a group of professionals and businessmen, with the active assistance of John Stevens, the United States Minister to Hawai‘i, acting with the United States Armed Forces, replaced the [Hawaiian] monarchy with a provisional government.’ ‘That government sought annexation by the United States’ (Newlands Resolution).” (US Supreme Court)

“Then the provisional government grew into the constitutional Republic of Hawai‘i, and we have fully recognized that as the rightful and permanent government of Hawai‘i, and have kept our minister and consul-general at Honolulu and our war ships in that bay to protect them and the Republic….”

“No nation in the world has refused recognition of the Republic of Hawai‘i as the rightful Government, and none of them question its soverign [sic] right to deal with any question that concerns the people of Hawai‘i.” (Fifty-Fifth Congress, Second Session, Committee on Foreign Relations, March 16, 1898)

“This act also establishes the fact that a treaty with a foreign State which declares the consent of such State to be annexed to the United States, although it is rejected by the Senate of the United States, is a sufficient expression and authentication of the consent of such foreign State to authorize Congress to enact a law providing for annexation …”

“… which, when complied with, is effectual without further legislation to merge the sovereignty of such independent State into a new and different relation to the United States and toward its own people.” (Fifty-Fifth Congress, Second Session, Committee on Foreign Relations, March 16, 1898)

On May 5, 1898, Representative Francis Newlands, of Nevada, offered a joint resolution addressing the annexation of Hawai‘i. Though considerable opposition to annexation was still manifested in the House, the Newlands resolutions were finally passed.

The resolutions were immediately reported to the Senate, which had been discussing the treaty for nearly a year. That body referred them to its Committee on Foreign Relations, which in turn at once favorably reported them.

On June 15, 1898, the Newlands resolution passed the House by a vote of 209 to 91; the vote on the Newlands Resolution in the Senate was 42 to 21 (2/3 of the votes by Senators were in favor of the resolution, a significantly greater margin was cast by Representatives in the House.) (Cyclopedic Review of Current History, 4th Quarter 1898)

The US Constitution, Article II, Section 2 states: “(The President) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur …” The following day, July 7, 1898, President McKinley signed the Newlands Resolution it into law.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Annexation-Here to Stay-PCA-July 14, 1898

July 6, 2016 by Peter T Young 1 Comment

Cane Fire

Slash and burn agriculture is a widely used method of growing food in which wild or forested land is clear cut and any remaining vegetation burned.

The resulting layer of ash provides the newly-cleared land with a nutrient-rich layer to help fertilize crops. (EcoLogic)

In the Islands, between AD 1100 and 1650, there was a period of expansion and agricultural intensification in Hawaii that accompanied an increase in human population. (Pratt)

Until about 1500 AD, agriculture was shifting cultivation using slash and burn techniques and long fallow periods. Between 1500 and 1800 A.D., agriculture expanded, intensified, and became permanent. (Cuddihy & Stone)

During that period the lowland vegetation below 1,500-feet elevation was almost entirely replaced by cultivated fields, dispersed settlements and grasslands, caused by repeated fires; while upland sites remained little disturbed. (Pratt)

Several of the large field systems have pronounced burn layers that represent wither the original removal of native tree cover or the use of fire for clearing fallow fields.

Fire was the primary tool used by Hawaiians to clear lands prior to cultivation. This was true in areas adjacent to irrigated valleys and windward slopes as well as in the great field systems. Fire may have been repeatedly used to periodically clear the secondary growth on fallow fields. (Cuddihy & Stone)

Fire was also used in marginal cultivations to burn off vegetation and increase the cover of ‘ama‘u ferns used as pig feed. Large expanses of the lowlands were regularly burned to clear woody vegetation and stimulate indigenous pili grass. (Pratt)

Agricultural burning is standard practice for many other kinds of crops on nearly 9-million acres throughout the country, including rice, wheat, corn, cotton, lentils and soybeans. (HC&S)

Fire was later used in the harvesting of sugarcane. Burning the cane before harvesting removes most of the dead vegetation without causing significant damage to the interior of the cane stalk. (James)

The sugarcane plant consists of about 75 percent to 80 percent net cane (stalks) from which the juice is extracted and the sugar crystalized. The other 20 percent to 25 percent of the plant consists of leafy material, including tops, from which little or no sugar is produced.

This leafy material is called trash. Burning sugarcane before harvest (or milling) removes from one-half to two-thirds of this trash that would otherwise contribute nothing to sugar production. (LSUAC)

In many countries, such as Brazil, Guatemala, Mexico, and Costa Rica, pre-harvest burning is a common practice. In the US and Philippines, sugarcane fields are burned either before or after harvest, but in India, most of the sugarcane residues are usually burned in the field only after harvest. (de Azeredo França)

In Australia, sugarcane burning started in the 1930s to combat Weil’s disease (leptospirosis) among cane-cutters. In other cane growing areas, burning was sometimes done to clear the field of snakes before hand-cutters cut the cane. (Cheesman)

There were attempts to use fire to get rid of pests, “When as an experiment, a patch of about nine acres of cane, so heavily attacked by leaf-hopper as to be useless, was set on fire all around to destroy these, it was noticed that the adult hoppers rose from the cane in a cloud and spread to other fields; so this plan for destroying them was of no value.” (HSPA, 1906)

It appears that the practice of burning sugarcane started in the early-1900s (some suggest in 1908.) Prior to that, cane trash (nonproductive leafy parts of the cane) was removed by hand (men chopped the cane; ‘holehole’ work, stripping the dried cane leaves, was deemed ‘women’s work.’)

The sugar in burned cane inverts after 48-hours and the lack of ability to quickly transport burned cane to mills limited its practice until the late-1920s when a macadamized road system and diesel trucks across the islands became widespread. (Hayakawa)

Later, pre-harvest burning, in the field, was the only economical means sugar planters found for removing the dried leafy material from its crop.

Removal of this dried leafy material reduces the quantity of material which needs to be hauled to the factory, including the soil adhering to the harvested material; reduces the number of haulers traveling back and forth and therefore reduces fuel consumption; reduces the amount of material the factory must handle and therefore its energy consumption; and improves sugar recovery. (HC&S)

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger

Sugarcane fire

Sugar Cane in Field-UH-Manoa-Library

Cane Fire-UH-Manoa-Library

Workers loading sugar cane-1905-BM

Chinese_contract_laborers_on_a_sugar_plantation_in_19th_century_Hawaii

Japanese sugar plantation workers in Hawaii around 1910 (BishopMuseum)

Sugar harvesting

Sugar_Cane_field-UH-Manoa-Digicoll-1900

Sugar-harvesting-UH_Library

July 5, 2016 by Peter T Young Leave a Comment

“Call the little baby Kīna’u.”

“I was born in the ‘Old Mission House’ in Honolulu on the 5th day of July, 1831. When I was but a few hours old, ‘Kīna’u,’ the Premier, came into the bedroom with her crowd of ‘kahus,’ took me into her arms and said that she wanted to adopt me, as she had no girl of her own.”

“My mother, in her weak state, was terribly agitated, knowing that the missionaries were unpopular and entirely dependent on the good-will of the natives, so feared the consequences of a denial. They sent for my father in haste, who took in the state of affairs at a glance.”

“’We don’t give away our children,’ he said to Kīna’u. ‘But you are poor, I am rich, I give you much money,’ replied the Chiefess. ‘No, you can’t have her,’ my father answered firmly. Kīna’u tossed me angrily down on the bed and walked away, leaving my poor mother in a very anxious frame of mind.” (Wilder; Wight)

“She accordingly went away in an angry and sullen mood, and was not heard from until the infant was being christened a few weeks later, when she again appeared, elbowed the father to one side, and exclaimed in the haughtiest of tones, ‘Call the little baby Kīna’u.’”

“Fearing that a second refusal would result disastrously, the parents agreed, and the child was accordingly christened Elizabeth Kīna’u Judd.” (The Friend, May 1912)

Kīna’u “seemed somewhat appeased after the (christening) ceremony, and, as I was the first white girl she had ever seen, deigned from that time on to show a great interest in me, either visiting me or having me visit her every day.” (Wright, Wight)

Kīna’u, daughter of Kamehameha I, became a Christian in 1830. She succeeded her aunt Kaʻahumanu as Kuhina Nui upon the latter’s death in 1832.

She acted as the Regent for her brother Kauikeaouli when he became King Kamehameha III, from June 5, 1832 to March 15, 1833. She would rule with him until her death. She was responsible for enforcing Hawaiʻi’s first penal code, proclaimed by the king in 1835.

Gerrit and Laura Judd were in the 3rd Company of missionaries. In 1839, at the request of King Kamehameha, Judd, a physician, looked after the royal children in the Chiefs’ Children’s School.

Judd left the mission in 1842 and for the next 10+ years served the Kingdom in various positions, including translator, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Minister of Interior and Commissioner to France, Great Britain & US.

The Judd’s child was not the only missionary child named for Hawaiian Chiefs or Chiefesses.

Maria Kapule Whitney was born October 19, 1820 to the Pioneer Company missionaries/teachers, Samuel and Mercy Whitney. She was “the first haole girl to be born in the Hawaiian archipelago,” and named for Kauai Chiefess Kapule, wife of Kauai’s King Kaumualiʻi.

Maria went to the mainland at the age of six to be educated; she returned to the Islands with the 11th Company. She married bachelor missionary Reverend John Fawcett Pogue of the 11th Company.

Reportedly, the daughter of Samuel and Nancy Ruggles (missionaries/teachers of the Pioneer Company) born on December 22, 1820, was named Sarah Trumbull Kaumuali’i Ruggles. (Some suggest her Hawaiian name was Ka‘amuali‘i.)

The Whitneys and Ruggles escorted Humehume (Prince George,) King Kaumuali‘i’s son, back to Kauai, where they set up a missionary station.

Lucia Kamāmalu Holman was daughter of Thomas and Lucia Ruggles Holman of the Pioneer Company (Lucia was Samuel Ruggles sister.) Holman was the mission’s first physician and was stationed in Kona. She was born March 2, 1821 on Kauai and named after Queen Kamāmalu, King Kamehameha II’s wife.

Elisabeth “Lizzie” Kaahumanu Bingham was born March 8, 1829 in Honolulu to Reverend Hiram and Sybil Bingham, leaders of the Pioneer Company of missionaries. She was named after Queen Kaʻahumanu, favorite wife of King Kamehameha I and a friend of the mission.

In 1840, Lizzie returned to the mainland with parents and, after graduating from Mount Holyoke, taught on the continent. Lizzie returned to Hawai‘i in 1868 to work at Kawaiahaʻo Seminary (until 1880.) She died November 27, 1899 in Honolulu.

Mary Kekāuluohi Clark was born to Ephraim and Mary Clark (from the 3rd Company of missionaries) on September 20, 1829. She was named for Kekāuluohi, who later became Kuhina Nui (as Kaʻahumanu III;) Kekāuluohi was mother of King Lunalilo.)

Harriet Keōpūolani Williston Richards was born in 1829 to Reverend William and Clarissa Richards of the 2nd Company of missionaries. (Harriet was sent to the continent and lived with the Willistons; when her father died, she was adopted by the Willistons and took their name.)

Harriet was named for the mother of King Kamehameha II and III. When the 2nd Company arrived in the Islands (1822,) Richards and others escorted Keōpūolani to Lahaina where Richards was stationed. William Richards left the mission in 1838 at the request of King Kamehameha III to become the King’s translator, counselor and political advisor.

Douglass Hoapili Baldwin was son of Reverend Dwight and Charlotte Baldwin of the 4th Company of missionaries. He was born in 1840 and died in 1843; Hoapili was Governor of Maui and lived in Lahaina (where the Baldwins were stationed at the time of Douglas’ birth.

Follow Peter T Young on Facebook

Follow Peter T Young on Google+

Follow Peter T Young on LinkedIn

Follow Peter T Young on Blogger